Assuming the same age, muscle mass, sex, eating habits etc., how much of a difference in metabolism is there between people? Would someone like Shugart have a 10% slower metabolism than Berardi? 20%, 30? How much of a difference is there really?
[quote]powersavant wrote:
Assuming the same age, muscle mass, sex, eating habits etc., how much of a difference in metabolism is there between people? Would someone like Shugart have a 10% slower metabolism than Berardi? 20%, 30? How much of a difference is there really?[/quote]
That is like asking, “how long is a piece of string?”. There is as much variance as there is population. As with most things, most people will tend to fall towards the middle of the spectrum with a few towards either extreme.
Some people build muscle easily as long as the calories are there. Others could struggle for years just to get their arms over 16". You can’t just look at someone and know this without understanding how their bodies respond to food intake and activity over time.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
powersavant wrote:
Assuming the same age, muscle mass, sex, eating habits etc., how much of a difference in metabolism is there between people? Would someone like Shugart have a 10% slower metabolism than Berardi? 20%, 30? How much of a difference is there really?
That is like asking, “how long is a piece of string?”. There is as much variance as there is population. As with most things, most people will tend to fall towards the middle of the spectrum with a few towards either extreme.
Some people build muscle easily as long as the calories are there. Others could struggle for years just to get their arms over 16". You can’t just look at someone and know this without understanding how their bodies respond to food intake and activity over time.[/quote]
Yes, could be a huge difference. But, like Professor X wrote, most are in between. I have an extremely slow metabolism, great if I am stranded without much food (yeah, that’ll happen)…I’ll last longer, but also means I have to be careful of overconsumption or I gain fast!
Most diet and training advice, gives you a “starting point”. After a while you’ll learn what intake and training works best for your own body.
[quote]SeaSiren wrote:
Professor X wrote:
powersavant wrote:
Assuming the same age, muscle mass, sex, eating habits etc., how much of a difference in metabolism is there between people? Would someone like Shugart have a 10% slower metabolism than Berardi? 20%, 30? How much of a difference is there really?
That is like asking, “how long is a piece of string?”. There is as much variance as there is population. As with most things, most people will tend to fall towards the middle of the spectrum with a few towards either extreme.
Some people build muscle easily as long as the calories are there. Others could struggle for years just to get their arms over 16". You can’t just look at someone and know this without understanding how their bodies respond to food intake and activity over time.
Yes, could be a huge difference. But, like Professor X wrote, most are in between. I have an extremely slow metabolism, great if I am stranded without much food (yeah, that’ll happen)…I’ll last longer, but also means I have to be careful of overconsumption or I gain fast!
Most diet and training advice, gives you a “starting point”. After a while you’ll learn what intake and training works best for your own body.[/quote]
Well said.
I have long since thought that I have a slow metabolism, even with heavy weight lifting and high intensity running, it’s easy for me to put on and keep a lot of mass…and fat if I don’t eat cleanly.
1,800 calories to me could be like 3,500 to another guy.
Time will tell and the mirror won’t lie.
[quote]powersavant wrote:
Assuming the same age, muscle mass, sex, eating habits etc., how much of a difference in metabolism is there between people? Would someone like Shugart have a 10% slower metabolism than Berardi? 20%, 30? How much of a difference is there really?[/quote]
Who knows? According to Berardi’s calculator, I should be eating ~4,500 kcals a day. That’s ~1,000 kcals over.
I’ve always had a slower-than-average metabolism. I wish I could eat 4.5K a day. Oh, how I wish.
Than again, maybe my metabolism is normal: it’s just that I, unlike others, metabolize all the calories I ingest.
Who the hell knows?
Yeah it’s different for everyone. While some crazy people on this site can velocity diet at 1500 calories and under, I can barely do pushups with 2000.
I actually used to be one of those low calorie survivors, and most people can become one of the, but after ranger school food becomes more and more like sex every day.
All of the replies are anecdotal. Have there been any studies of resting metabolic rate to determine what the metabolic curve is?
[quote]powersavant wrote:
All of the replies are anecdotal. Have there been any studies of resting metabolic rate to determine what the metabolic curve is?[/quote]
No offense, but you sound like yet another person who expects for scientific studies to be their personal guide to life without realizing science is often stumbling in the dark as well. Any studies done on medical issues are largely done on middle aged sick women. The type of study you are discussing would have to involve a ridiculously HUGE patient pool of thousands, if not millions, ranging from obese housewives to sprinting college students. It would have to include the Ronnie Colemans and people like that fat guy from Rosanne.
In other words, the “study” you are asking about isn’t even realistic and will probably NEVER be done until every child born has his entire DNA code and probability for life mapped out like GATTACA.
That means that “anecdotal” is what you will get along with educated guesses from educated people. Either accept that…or do your own study on the above mentioned millions.
Get to it.
I read through this thread and wanted to link to an article that I found interesting regardin metabolism typing. Very informative with all sorts of “traits” associated with efficient and inefficient metabolism. Inefficient not being a bad thing…just a way to refer to calorie expenditure…anyway…here it is:
I found it interesting to see what of each characteristics I had, and surprised to see how accurate this article was!!